Ukraine war: Johnson says if Putin were a woman he would not have invaded

[Discovereads]

Russian President Vladimir Putin would not have invaded Ukraine if he were a woman, Boris Johnson has claimed. The UK prime minister said the "crazy, macho" invasion was a "perfect example of toxic masculinity" and he called for "more women in positions of power". www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-61976526

This had me in stitches yesterday. Boris shamelessly lying to try and get women’s votes. It must have escaped his pea brain that the last ruler to invade the Ukraine was Catherine the Great, also Russian, but most definitely a woman. And in comparison, she succeeded where it remains to be seen whether Putin will succeed in annexing the Ukraine or not.

Does BoJo really think we are that stupid?

He’s right though. Most women don’t govern like Catherine the Great. Half the stories about her are invented in the service of a constructed image anyway. Men are more warmongering than women.

I agree with him to some extent. Probably only one of two things that I do agree with about, along with his parties stance on women and gender.

Sorry that was terrible English.

Whatever his motives are for saying this, I think he is right.
Putin has exhibited signs of toxic masculinity on many occasions.

As for more women in positions of power, he is right about that, too.
But preferably not women who have been subsumed by toxic masculinity, such as cool girls, handmaidens, liberal “feminists” and the like.

Thatcher/Argentina?

A large majority of men other than Putin would not have invaded the Ukraine. Putin is indeed an example of toxic masculinity but it is his own specific personality and circumstances that have led to this point.

What Johnson fails to spot is that he himself is also a prime example of toxic masculinity. The fact that he hasn't invaded a country (yet) doesn't make him a saint.

Lol. If Putin were a woman he wouldn’t be Putin. Dictatoring isn’t an equal opportunity career.

What? Thatcher didn’t invade Argentina.

But yes OP, Blow Job does think we’re stupid.

I think more to the point that conservative central office Comms people probably do. No more so than other political party's Comms teams, though. I can only imagine what Labour's or the SNP's think.

Males commit more than 90% of violent crime. Boris probably has a point.

I don't know that stats on the sex of leaders are as helpful however because I suspect it is far more difficult for a woman to become a leader and that in itself is going to favour specific personality types over others.

Boris is an extremely obvious example of male privilege and toxic masculinity in both his personal relationships and the fact he's managed to become PM at all.

It is notable that one of the backlashes against women beginning to gain some equity with men, was to propagate the idea that in order to be perceived as equal with men, we must pretend women are equally strong and equally inclined to commit violent and sexual crimes.

1. Johnson is not only old enough to remember the Falklands War but also reveres Mrs Thatcher.
2. I'm no expert on Russia/Ukraine/Nato but that doesn't sound like a good analysis of what's going on.
3. Johnson only ever seems to talk about women when he's in the shit.

Once again BJ saying the right things for the wrong motivation because it really does work.

MrsSkylerWhite
Thatcher/Argentina?
What? Thatcher didn’t invade Argentina.

But yes OP, Blow Job does think we’re stupid.”

no, she didn’t 🤣
Was very, very quick to war with Argentina over the Falklands though.

Defending territory with force when someone invades is what we elect people to do. Putin is driving a new Russian imperialism. Not the same.

achillestoes · Today 10:00
Defending territory with force when someone invades is what we elect people to do. Putin is driving a new Russian imperialism. Not the same“

that assumes we all believe that the territory should be “ours” in the first place.
I don’t 🤷‍♀️

I'm left wondering why it's so awful that a politician would try to appeal to female voters? Of course it's cynical but right about now I'd be grateful for any other party behaving as if my vote had value to them so a cynical attempt to appeal to me is better than naked misogyny used by other parties to repel me.

I agree with him.

I remember reading an article about Saddam and George Bush. It said give these people two toddlers to look after and there’d be no wars as they wouldn’t have time or energy’

I honestly think it’s make entitlement that mainly states wars. I know Thatcher and Argentina. But she wasn’t actually a human.

I agree that toxic masculinity exists. I also agree we need more women in positions of power. What I don’t agree with is saying that women are inherently more peaceful rulers than men- eg that if a woman ruled Russia there’d have been no invasion of the Ukraine.

That is what is know as positive sexism. Not all sexism has negative stereotypes, it often has positive ones too. We’ve all been fed them. Like mums are “naturally” better at child care than men. That women are “naturally” better at communication and have higher emotional IQs. The idea that world peace is simply a matter of replacing ruling men with ruling women is just more sexism.

‘What I don’t agree with is saying that women are inherently more peaceful rulers than men- eg that if a woman ruled Russia there’d have been no invasion of the Ukraine.’

It’s not necessarily inherent. But it is true that probably (based on how we see women behaving) it wouldn’t have happened.

I don’t agree. Probability based on the historical record of Europe would indicate that if a Mrs Putin were ruling Russia, the chance of an invasion would just as probable. Perhaps even more probable if the below study is anything to go by.

Throughout history, queens were more likely to wage war than kings. In fact, between 1480 and 1913, Europe’s queens were 27% more likely than its kings to wage war, according to a National Bureau of Economics working paper (paywall). And queens were also more likely to amass new territory during their reigns, found the paper’s authors, economists Oeindrila Dube and S.P. Harish.

Whilst I understand your point, I think that suggesting women shouldn’t have the right to bodily autonomy is also nakedly misogynistic. Bit of push me pull you from BJ to deflect then?

Agreed…there’s plenty of toxic masculinity floating about those two.

@FOJN
I'm left wondering why it's so awful that a politician would try to appeal to female voters?
It wouldn’t be awful if there were a shred of honesty in it. In reality it’s like love bombing from an abuser….not to be trusted.

Males commit more than 90% of violent crime.

A good point, if a female was leading it is less likely

Discovereads

That’s interesting. Do you have a link?

But of course Putin isn’t a king and this isn’t the 15th century. The conception of queenship in the era of countries being led into battle by a monarch is complex. Women are still much less prone to violence than men.